U.S. should continue to use tariffs as a method of controlling trade

           The U.S. should continue to use tariffs as a method of controlling trade. I agree if their purpose use tariffs as a method to help and protect or reserve American job, also protects American companies from unfair competition. However, real reason that the government prohibits some imports and taxes is to rewards the industries with the most political influence.

                                            "Phoenix Talons"

           

            The article “Chicken Feet”

The result of investigation of the China Animal Agriculture Association found that “the import of American chicken parts made the competition in the domestic market very severe”. China’s Ministry of Commerce announced imposing antidumping tariffs ranging from 43.1%-105.4% on imports of chicken parts from the U.S.  Also, President Obama fights back by announced tariffs of up to 35% on tire imports from China. Plus Obama signaled that the U.S. would also take a tougher stand on Chinese currency, which economists say is undervalued by as much as 40% driving down the price of Chinese exports.

            In my perspective, China and The U.S. though we are punishing a foreign government for hurting us by imposing tariff to each other. But the foreign politicians don't care very much that we restrict imports from their country. In fact, they may like it. They are politicians, not producers. They don't export anything expect speeches. Our import barriers just give them an excuse to subsidize their favorite exporters or otherwise increase their power.The real victims of our government's retaliation are you and the foreign workers. The foreign workers don't get to sell to you, and you don't get to buy what you want at the lowest price.

War on terrorism as an unintened barrier to trade?

          I agree that terrorist attack as a cause of unintened barrier to trade. After September 11, 2001 or called Nine Eleven, As the article state that President George W. Bush instructed the U.S. Coast Guard to take additional measures to guard bridge in U.S. harbors and sites such as the Statue of Liberty. American government launch a new security policy, therefore to secure their people and their important facilities.

However, more tightten security at air and seaports as well as land border crossing. Some disruption of trade flos during the immediate afterthe attack seemed almost inevitable, additional frictiona trading costs due to tightten sccurity have effect trade not only in North America but also world wide.

Detroit's Big Three!

According to the article discussing the Detroit’s Big Three obstacles, it is shown that General Motors, Ford and Chrysler are losing thousands of dollars on cars produced. Because of the retiree healthcare from which workers are  benefiting from social advantages which conducted Detroit Big Three losing up to $ 1,500 per vehicle.
In my opinion, to be competitive, General Motors, Ford and Chrysler should respond to the market demand by offering diverse products, but it is a hard task to execute when the total dept is still increasing especially the retiree healthcare payments which were for about $ 7.5 billion for GM and $ 6.3 billion for Ford.
I also think that today’s situation is favorable for Detroit Big Three to gain an important increase in both sales and customer trust. Toyota’s last communication problem could help GM, Ford and Chrysler to change its customer perception especially the quality of domestic products by the way to increase national sales.
David Wech has published an article  in Business Week Journal May 31, 2007  discussing the profitability and productivity of Detroit vs Toyota and Honda. When General Motors spent about 32.4 hours to build a car as well Honda, Chrysler was close enough by spending 33 hours in the same circumstances. However, domestic cars produced were as productive as Japanese cars. The difference is that Japanese are using more than 100% of their production capacity to build a car and have low expenses in comparison to Detroit’s Big Three. According to the same General Motors use 93% as well as Honda but Chrysler use only 88%, Ford 77% of its total production capacity.
This situation gives Japanese cars a comparative advantage and let U.S imports from Japan more frequently while domestic cars still in dump, suffering from federal depts and retiree healthcare expenses.

How open to openness are you?

          I agree with the openess of an economy. It would gain more benefit to the country but also the openess have a risk-linkages between country risk and the openness of an economy as well. 
         
          The benefit for the country that run a policy of openness, It minimizes the interference with capital flows and allows supply and demand to operate in financial markets. It avoids a state monopoly on exports and imports. it keeps government regulation to bare necessities for an orderly market economy. Above all, it relies primarily on a private market system of profits and losses to guide production, rather than depending on public ownership and control or the commands of a government planning system.

          The risk-linkages between country risk and the openness of an economy would cause downsizing for the local company, People in particular country will lose their job because importing of policy of openness that offer a less tariff. After people lost their job would effect the economy because people do not have money to spend so it would cause deflation in particular country.